Comment on Iran

Recently, Ayatollah Mohammad Baqr Kharrazi, secretary-general of the Hezbollah-Iran organization and part of the Iranian regime elite,[1] announced his candidacy for the upcoming Iranian presidential election set for June 2013. He has promised that if elected he will restore Iranian sovereignty over the territories of Tajikistan, Armenia, and Azerbaijan, which it lost under the 1828 Treaty of Turkmenchay with Russia.[2]

Kharrazi’s comments were criticized by Iranian Ambassador to Armenia Mohammad Raisi, who explained that he is a cleric whose statements lack official status, and by the website Entekhab, which questioned whether he was really an ayatollah, and said that his statements were not be taken seriously because they were intended solely as a provocation.

Ayatollah Kharrazi [3]

Ayatollah Kharrazi: Iran Must Regain The Territories It Lost Under The Treaty Of Turkmenchay

On February 3, 2013, the Iranian website Teribon published Ayatollah Kharrazi’s speech from the previous day, in which he announced his presidential candidacy. Among his statements, Kharrazi promised his audience that “if I am elected president, I will regain Tajikistan, Armenia, and Azerbaijan for Iran.”[4]

Along with Kharrazi’s announcement that he would run for president, the website also published an image of the December 15, 2012 front page of the newspaper of the Hezbollah-Iran organization, which featured a map with arrows pointing to Tajikistan, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. The map’s caption read: “The next Hezbollah[-Iran] government will undertake legal-political and even military action to end the shameful Treaty of Turkmenchay.”

Teribon (Iran), February 3, 2013.

On February 9, 2013, the Iranian news agency ISNA published the text of a speech given by Ayatollah Kharrazi at the opening ceremony of the Bandar Abbas bureau of the Hezbollah-Iran newspaper. In his speech, Kharrazi said: “We must act legally [to] regain Iran’s northern territories, [which were lost] 99 [sic] years ago under the Treaty of Turkmenchay. As [part] of our legal relationship with the West, we will force them [to accept this], just as they accepted Hong Kong’s [return] to China after 99 years.”[5]

Iranian Ambassador To Armenia: Kharrazi Is A Cleric, His “Statements Have No Validity”

Iranian Ambassador to Armenia Mohammad Raisi told an Azerbaijani news agency that “the Iranian government affirms and respects the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Tajikistan. As you know, Kharrazi is a cleric and has no official post in Iran.

He continued: “Iran is a free country in which anyone can speak his mind. Iran’s official position on foreign policy matters is expressed solely by the Leader [Ali Khamenei], the president, and the foreign minister. All other statements have no validity.”[6]

Iranian Website Entekhab: Kharrazi’s Statements Are Not Serious, And Maybe He’s Not Really An Ayatollah Anyway

On February 17, 2013, the Iranian website Entekhab published the Tajikistani and Azerbaijani ambassadors’ reactions to Kharrazi’s statements. It also postulated that Kharrazi might not even actually be an ayatollah, and added that he was only seeking attention and shouldn’t be taken seriously. It said:

“Some political analysts believe that this man’s [Kharrazi's] statements are often taken seriously due to his lineage: He is the son of Ayatollah Mohsen Kharrazi (an Assembly of Experts member), the brother of Mohammad Sadeq [Kharrazi, former Iranian ambassador to France], and the nephew of Kamal Kharrazi [former Iranian foreign minister, former Iranian ambassador to the U.N., and current head of the Foreign Relations Strategic Council].

“According to these analysts, Kharrazi was attempting to appeal to his audience’s nationalism… It seems that this man [Kharrazi] uses every opportunity to be seen and to be talked about – but [his statements] are never taken seriously.

“However, the neighboring countries’ reactions to his most recent statements were harsh, first of all because he is a cleric, [even] called by some an ayatollah (whether rightly or not), and he is connected to one of important families of Iranian politics.

“[Secondly,] it is said that he was also an [Iranian presidential] candidate in 2005 but was disqualified by the Guardian Council…”

Tajikistan’s Foreign Ministry posted its response to Kharrazi’s statements on its official website. It said: “These statements by [Kharrazi, who is] related to Iran’s previous foreign minister, surprised and saddened Tajikistan’s cultural, political, and social circles, and they constitute interference in the internal affairs of an independent country. This cleric is not aware of the current realities of the region, the world, or the judicial system.”

[1] Kharrazi is also the brother-in-law of Masoud Khamenei, the son of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei; his father is Assembly of Experts member Ayatollah Mohsen Kharrazi.
[2] The Treaty of Turkmenchay was signed in 1828 between Russia and Persia; under it, the Persian Shah was forced to cede the territories of Armenia, Nakhchivan, and Talysh to Russia. In the 1813 Treaty of Gulistan, Persia was forced to cede the territories of Azerbaijan, Daghestan, and modern Georgia to Russia. Iran considers these treaties humiliating, because they ended the Persian Empire’s control of the Caucasus and Central Asia.
[3] ISNA (Iran), February 9, 2013.
[4] Teribon.ir, February 3, 2013
[5] ISNA, February 9, 2013.
[6] Asr-e Iran (Iran), February 12, 2013.
[7] Entekhab (Iran), February 17, 2013.

Until the Iranian government actually tests a nuclear device, it would be folly to attack the mullahs. These fanatics can not be permitted, however, to possess a weapon that can threaten Europe and Sunni Arab nations such as their arch-enemy, Saudia Arabia. No argument can be advanced that justifies a weapon in the hands of these fundamentalists because Russia, China, India, and Pakistan are not potential adversaries.

Obviously, a WMD is primarily directed at Israel, therefore the Jewish state and the Iranian theocracy are existential adversaries. Israel should be held to the same standard as other counties and be compelled to disclose its number of nukes. Perhaps such a dose of reality will jolt the Iranian people into the realization that regime change would be in their self-interest.

“United Nations weapons inspectors have amassed a trove of new evidence that they say makes a ‘credible’ case that ‘Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear device’, and that the project may still be under way.”

“…The report laid out the case that Iran had moved far beyond the blackboard to create computer models of nuclear explosions in 2008 and 2009 and conducted experiments on nuclear triggers. It said the simulations focused on how shock waves from conventional explosives could compress the spherical fuel at the core of a nuclear device, which starts the chain reaction that ends in nuclear explosion.”

This is an intelligence indicator that demonstrates nefarious intent. With unity and determination, Iranian ambitions to assert hegemony in their perceived sphere of influence can be thwarted because it will not be in the self-interest of Russia and China to witness the obliteration of their trade partner.

Like Hitler, who dreamed of a Greater Germany (Lebensraum) and a thousand year Reich, the Iranian government dreams of a Greater Iran (see below). Territorial ambition includes the Gulf and Central Asia. Although the Arab Spring may inhibit their ambition in the short term, the long term policy of these religious zealots is apocalyptic and suicidal.

When one considers the parallels between Shiite Iran and the Nazis, these comparisons are both profound, troubling, and portend evil for the world.

The mistake with Iran is the tendency to think its leadership is rational. This may not be the case. The country’s leaders are Islamic fundamentalists who would surely kill any member of the Saudi royal family, custodians of the holy city of Mecca and fervid Sunnis all. The Iranians are just as fervid Shiites. They have many enemies, including their own people, whom they oppress in the name of God and torture with abandon. In Iraq, the Iranians have gotten away with a proxy war against the United States.

The Iranians have their Japanese/Chinese; Italian/Syrian allies. Instead of physical occupation, the Iranian/Nazi Germany regime exercises Anschluss with Iraq/Austria through political influence and interference with fellow Shiites: Moqtada al-Sadr. Iranians pursue religious ideology while Nazis followed racial ideology… for the minority elite.

The Revolutionary Guard constitutes a “parallel security state within Iran” and resembles the Shutz Staffel (Protection Squadron), Hitler’s SS, or body guard. Instead of protecting a person, however, this elite group protects the Iranian Revolution and its clerics. Independent of the regular military establishment, the Revolutionary Guard is deeply entrenched within the Iranian economy.

By some estimates, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard — the hard-line element of the armed forces, supported by the supreme leader — controls 40 percent of the economy.

The commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard all but admitted Tuesday that his elite military branch is overseeing the country’s domestic politics, shutting both the country’s reformists and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s confidantes out of power.

The extent of the Revolutionary Guards’ control over the Iranian economy is apparent as soon as you enter the country. They run the main international airport, and the manner in which they acquired it was a bruising demonstration of the way big business is now done in Iran.

The contract for managing Imam Khomeini airport, south of Tehran, was given to a Turkish-Austrian consortium in 2004, but on 8 May, the day it was supposed to open, guardsmen took it over, blocking the runways with their vehicles, and closing it down. Inbound flights had to be hastily diverted.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) declared that the involvement of foreigners posed a security risk because of an alleged link to Israel, but it was clear that the foreign consortium’s biggest mistake was to try to cut the IRGC out of its business model.

Ever since, excluding the guards has been exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, from Iran’s economy.

In the following 2009 article , a Kuwaiti columnist presented a novel premise concerning the mullahocracy in Iran. Their policy to spread their ideology of religious and cultural superiority, resembles Hitler’s propagation of Nazism in eastern Europe to subjugate inferior Slavic peoples.

Kuwaiti Columnist: Iran’s Policy of Exporting the Islamic Revolution Is No Different Than the Nazi Occupation of Europe

It has been brought to MEMRI’s attention by the Kuwaiti Embassy in Washington, D.C. that the author of this article is Kuwaiti columnist Ahmad Al-Fahd, and not the Kuwaiti deputy prime minister, who is commonly referred to in the Kuwaiti media by the same name. We regret the mistake; the report has been corrected (http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/3660.htm).

On August 23, 2009, the Kuwaiti daily Al-Watan published an article by Kuwaiti columnist Ahmad Al-Fahd stating that Iran’s policy of exporting the Islamic Revolution is aimed at taking over the neighboring countries and plundering their wealth – in striking parallel to Hitler’s agenda.

Following are excerpts from the article:

“Iran’s Aim is to Take Over the Surrounding Countries… This Ideology… Resemble[s] Hitler’s Occupation of Europe”“

“A week ago, in a ceremony organized by the mayor of Istanbul and attended by Ayatollah Akhtari [1] from Iran, [Dr.] Ibrahim Al-Ashaiqer Al-Ja’fari [2] from Iraq, and Mahdi Yahfoufi [3] from Lebanon, a foundation was laid for the construction of a Shi’ite religious and cultural complex in Istanbul, under the auspices of the Istanbul Municipal Council.

“This suggests that the idea of exporting the [Islamic] Revolution was not [conceived by Iran] either with the view of delivering the people of the [target] countries from darkness and bringing them into the Iranian enlightenment, or in hope of reviving in these countries the concept of ‘the rule of the jurisprudent.’ [Rather,] Iran’s aim is to take over the surrounding countries – first in order to ensure Iran’s survival, and second in order to fill the pockets and caches of the Tehran mullahs.

“This ideology, and the way it is being implemented, resemble Hitler’s occupation of Europe, which began in Poland. Hitler’s aim in occupying Europe was neither to compel the Poles, the French, or the Belgians to salute him by raising their arms and saying ‘Heil Hitler,’ nor to have portraits of him and his mistress hung on historical buildings. [Rather,] he occupied Europe so as to use the treasures of [European] countries to build a German empire.

“Iran employs various means [to achieve its goal]: it supports Al-Maliki’s party in Iraq; it sends money… to Hizbullah in Lebanon; its ambassador meets with parliamentary candidates and former parliament members of various democratic countries in [Iran's] embassy. And it seeks not so much to revive ‘the rule of the jurisprudent’ as it seeks to take over these countries and to plunder whatever it can lay its hands on.

“[Iran] purloined Iraq’s security [and] stability, thereby redirecting all religious tourism to its own holy sites. It attacked the Ashraf camp [of the Iranian opposition], and sanctioned the killing of the Mojahedeen-e Khalq by the Iraqi regime – rather than [soil] its own hands [with their blood].[4] Whenever the attention of the international community is drawn to Iran’s nuclear reactors, Iran [employs a diversionary tactic] by pitting Hizbullah in Lebanon against Israel.”

If Iran Really Seeks To Bring Enlightenment to the World, Why Does It Export the Revolution Only to Its Neighbors?

“Let us assume, tongue in cheek and for the sake of argument, that Iran seeks to spread Islam and tolerance, and to deliver humanity from darkness to light – the Iranian light, of course. Then why does it persist in exporting the Islamic Revolution only to the countries neighboring it, which are Islamic to begin with, or to [other] countries whose population is Muslim? Why doesn’t it send its preachers to China, to towns on the banks of the Amazon, or to the African desert?… Don’t these towns, deserts, or savannahs need ayatollahs like Akhtari, Ibrahim Al-Ashaiqer Al-Ja’fari, or Mahdi Yahfoufi? [Don't they need] cultural centers and mosques more than Istanbul, that ‘mother of mosques,’ [5] does?”

Endnotes:

[1] Ayatollah Mohammad Hassan Akhtari is deputy of international affairs in the office of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, and former Iranian ambassador to Syria.

[2] Former Iraqi prime minister.

[3] Representative of the Supreme Islamic Council of the Shi’ite Community in Lebanon.

The Iranian Supremacy Manifesto of ‘Greater Iran’: Hezbollah-Iran Secretary-General Lays Out Plan, Strategy for Reestablishing ‘Greater Iran’ as Prelude to Establishment of Global Government Led by the Mahdi

The secretary-general of the Hezbollah-Iran organization, Ayatollah Mohammad Baqer Kharrazi, who is an elite member of Iran’s Islamic regime,[1] recently published an article on the organization’s website discussing the need to reestablish “Greater Iran,” stretching from Palestine to Afghanistan and based on the pre-Islamic Persian Empire,[2] as a preparatory stage for the coming of the Mahdi – the Hidden Imam (the Shi’ite Messiah). In his article, Ayatollah Kharrazi stresses Iran’s superiority over the Arabs and the other peoples in the region.

Ayatollah Kharrazi sets out in detail Hezbollah-Iran’s manifesto.[3] The first stage involves the establishment of Greater Iran on the territory of the ancient Persian Empire; it will include the various ethnic groups and peoples in the Middle East, Central Asia, the Caucasus, and Afghanistan, and create a union of Islamic states, led by Iran. The unification of the states and peoples of these regions into Greater Iran will not be carried out by military occupation, he says, but peaceably, as in the case of the European Union.[4]

In subsequent stages, he writes, the Iranian Empire will face the transregional unions that belong to the ‘arrogance’ – i.e. the U.S. and Russia – and will unify the oppressed(mustazafin) into a global village to stand against the arrogant, in advance of the establishment of a global government headed by the Mahdi.

Ayatollah Kharrazi also discusses the question of why the Koran appeared in Arabic, not in Persian, and why the figures holy to Shi’ite Muslims, i.e. the Prophet himself and the Twelve Imams, were all Arabs, not Persians – in a way that reveals his hostility and arrogance towards the Arabs.

In his article, Ayatollah Kharrazi goes beyond the traditional Islamic-Shi’ite values of the Islamic Republic of Iran – chiefly,velayat-e faqih, or “rule of the jurisprudent,” and belief in the messianic deliverance of the Shi’ia by the Hidden Imam (Mahdi) – and lays out the foundations of Greater Iran based on pre-Islamic Iranian-Persian nationalism and on pre-Islamic Persian empires, defining all the peoples who lived in those lands as Iranians.

Following are excerpts from his article: [5]

Arabic – An Inferior Language; Arabs – The Greatest Infidels

Ayatollah Kharrazi first discusses the superiority of the Persian people, language, and culture relative to the ignorance of the Arabs during thejahiliyya(i.e. pre-Islamic period), explaining: “…The Koran was given in Arabic, [of all languages], not because of [Arabic's]superiority and its preferred status over the other languages, but in order to inspire the Jahili Arabs who were without religion, [and] who had nothing [of worth] except the Arabic language, so that they could know the wonders of the Koran in the poorest of the world’s languages[i.e. Arabic].

“[Likewise,] Ahl Al-Bayt [members of the Prophet Muhammad's family]… from Abraham to the Mahdi, appeared in Arab society [of all societies], so that the wondrous existence [of Ahl Al-Bayt and the Koran] would be revealed… [even] to the greatest contrarians on earth, the hypocrites [munafekin] and the great infidels among them… And the greatest infidels and the biggest hypocrites [on earth] are the Arabs.

“Persian is the most superior language of the dwellers of Paradise, while Arabic is the most inferior of their languages – and if this were not so, Persian would not have been designated by the Prophet Muhammad as the language of love and [the language] in which the truths of the Koran are explained…”

Iran – The Homeland of Islam and of Muslims Worldwide

“Ahl Al-Bayt’s full cooperation with [the four] early Righteous Caliphs, with the Ummayad caliphs and with the Abbassid caliphs in the conquest of Iran; the eastward and westward spread from Iran in the days of ‘Ali [the first imam in the Shi'a], and the revered appearance of Hassan and Hussein [the second and third imams in the Shi'a], which are among [the foundations] of the Iranians’ belief… as well as the Iranians’ recruitment by Ahl Al-Bayt to play such an impressive role in the Islamic empire in the region at that time… – [all these] are a sign that Iran is the homeland of Islam and of Muslims across the world, and of all the peoples and nations of [the monotheistic] religions as well as the other nations… [Just like] ‘Lesser Iran’ is [homeland] to those who emigrated to the rest of the regions of the world, [so all the nations in these regions] must be likewise defined… geographically and territorially, as part of ‘Greater Iran.’”

Kharrazi now enumerates further facts that, in his opinion, prove that Greater Iran is the true homeland of the Muslims: “The transfer [of the center of the Shi'ite spiritual world] from [the city of] Najaf [in Iraq] to [the city of] Qom [in Iran]; the emergence of the Shi’ite regime of velayat-e faqih [i.e., the 'rule of the jurisprudent,'] from Qom in Iran…; the export of the banner of the Islamic revolution and the bringing together of the factions of Islam based on love for Ahl Al-Bayt; Wahhabism’s current political-military link to the oppositional and satanic U.S. and British regimes, as well as [Wahhabism's] penetration of the Arab and even the Islamic world; the emergence of an axis of resistance, of truth against lies, and religion against anti-religion – centered around the resistance of Iran under velayat-e faqih to Zionist Judaism – and the undoubted importance of [the decree] of Imam [Ayatollah] Khomeini and of the leader of the Islamic revolution today [i.e. Ali Khamenei] that Israel must be annihilated – all these are evidence of a reality in which ‘Greater Iran’ is the homeland of the Muslims… [and of] all other peoples. Moreover, [Greater Iran] is the one fighting the cancerous growths of Wahhabism, Ba’thism, pan-Arabism, and Israel, which have emerged on its borders, in order to remove them or destroy them.”

The Very Existence of the Iranian Regime is Contingent upon the Elimination of Israel

“The very existence of our velayat-e faqih regime is contingent upon the elimination of the corrupt ‘factions’[6] mentioned above [i.e. Wahhabism, Ba'thism, pan-Arabism, and Israel] and on the elimination of Israel; and it falls to our oppressed nation within Lesser Iran, and to it alone, to pay any political, military, economic, or social price in the struggle to eliminate and destroy [these 'factions'] and their homeland – Israel.”

“1. Your being Arab, Azeri, Kurd, Baluchi, Luri, Turkmen, Persian, Tajik, Caucasian, Afghan, or anything else [is of no significance]. None of these [in themselves] are considered Iranian, because Iran is the sum total of the abovementioned peoples. The [nation]-states of the above peoples, which today border Iran, are actually territory that was severed from the state [that is, from Greater Iran] – a separation that was the result of a scheme by the other religions or by the historical plunderers due to the weakness of Iran’s rulers at that time.[7]

“The fact that a small part of these peoples live today within Lesser Iran indicates that they might exist [again] in harmony as part of Greater Iran; for the need to return the peoples to the bosom of their true mother[land, Greater Iran], has already been mentioned above… For the same reason, the Arabism of all the Arabs in the Arab world today means that they are Iranians – just as the Lurism of all the Luris, the Turkmenism of all the Turkmen, the Baluchism of all the Baluchis, the Turkishness of all the Turks… and the Caucasianism of all the Caucasians means that they are Iranians.

“2. The payment being made solely by the Iranian nation, its government, and its leaders to cover the expenses of the struggle against America and Israel is derived from our nationhood and our Iranianness – just as our nationhood and our Iranianness also obligate us to accept the [principle] of velayat-e faqih and the rule of the Ahl Al-Bayt. Accordingly, just as the Iranian nation cannot tolerate part of Khozestan being separated from it… and is [therefore] working to defend it from the oppressing world of the arrogance, [the Iranian nation] must defray the costs of the wars being fought by the Iranian nation of Lebanon and by the Iranian nation of Palestine – [since these nations] lived under Iranian rule centuries ago.[8]

“Of course, [these peoples in Lebanon and Palestine] must know that they are not considered [fully] Iranian, but that their peoples’ identification with Iran [is based on their once having been] part of Greater Iran. Thus they were once defined, and thus they must [continue] to be defined. Likewise, it must be known that the strategy of Hezbollah[-Iran] and of its future governments is not only [a strategy] of struggle against demands by some of the abovementioned peoples who are [fighting for] independence from Lesser Iran, but [is also a strategy] of returning all these peoples to the bosom of the homeland and establishing a Greater Iran.

“3. The return of the Iranian peoples to their homeland, Greater Iran, constitutes in effect the restoration and reattachment of limbs amputated from the original body. It is absolutely impossible for this to be accomplished by military force, as former attempts have shown; instead, all political, propaganda, cultural, social, and even economic means must be used, so that the era of return will be achieved in the best, friendliest, and safest way – as the Europeans and the Americans did and continue to do to establish the unity of their states [that is, the European Union and the United States of America].

“4. In order to attain the maximal relationship [among these peoples], there is [also] a need… to reorganize and reclassify all the Iranian groups of peoples and tribes – not just to renew past genetic and cultural ties between the peoples that were separated from Iran and those within the borders of today’s Lesser Iran.

“Any confederate or federal regime of any kind with a capital outside the borders of today’s Lesser Iran must be avoided. There is also a need not only to build cadres and human resources, but [also] to found a movement for a spontaneous [self-motivated] return to today’s Lesser Iran by the peoples separated from Greater Iran. Rehabilitation, modernization, and the conquest of all the peaks of religious and national knowledge are not the only [religious] requirements incumbent upon the individual; the inclusion of the states of the abovementioned peoples under the regional unity [of Greater Iran] is also essential, in order for them to be ultimately incorporated [into Greater Iran]. It is [also] necessary to regain the lands that were cut off [from Greater Iran] by means of engaging and speaking with today’s global superpowers.”

Based on the above principles, Kharrazi states that “establishing Greater Iran will also have other ramifications:

“1. It will create a proportional balance between the population and territory [of Greater Iran] and the population and territory of the [regions controlled by] the Western arrogance [i.e., the U.S.] and the Eastern arrogance [i.e., Russia].

“2. It will be a forceful presence in the Security Council and all other international organizations.

“3. It will create the maximal proximity between the borders of the area under the rule [of the jurisprudent] and the political and geographical boundaries of the regions controlled by the arrogance.

“4. It will [assist] the countries on the front of the struggle with the arrogance, and spare them the need to bear the cost [of this struggle].

“5. It will maximize the production areas, the jurisdiction and the revenues of Iran and the region under the rule of the jurisprudent, and will transform the Shi’ite Crescent into a trapezoid under the rule of the jurisprudent.

“6. It will redress the complaint [of Iranians] who object to the fact that ‘Lesser Iran’ must bear the cost of the struggle to eliminate Israel [relying] solely on its own resources. Establishing Greater Iran will [make it easier] to bear these costs.”[9]

The author concludes by spelling out the connection between his territorial-national perceptions and the Shi’ite belief in the coming of the Mahdi:

“This strategic perception of Hezbollah[-Iran] constitutes a preliminary step towards establishing a union of Islamic states, which in turn is a preliminary step towards establishing a global village of the oppressed [as opposed to the 'world of the arrogance']. This in turn will herald the establishment of a global government under the rule of the Mahdi. Thus, the establishment of Greater Iran is undoubtedly a necessity for pleasing the Mahdi, and the Period of Anticipation[10] will not end unless we implement the four principles listed above.”

Endnotes:

[1] Kharrazi is brother-in-law to Mas’oud Khamenei, son of Iranian Supreme Leader ‘Ali Khamenei, and also the brother of Sadeq Kharrazi, former Iranian Ambassador to France and current director of the Iran Diplomacy website.

[2] The “Persian Empire” is a general term for all of the dynasties that ruled in the region between the 7th century BCE until the Islamic conquest in the 7th century CE, including the Achaemenid dynasty to which Cyrus the Great belonged, as well as the Sassanid and Parthian dynasties.

[3] In the June 2009 presidential elections, Hezbollah-Iran did not support Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, claiming that only clerics should be allowed to hold the office of president. Parsine.com (Iran), May 16, 2010.

[4] Ayatollah Kharrazi also refers to the U.S. as another example of union by peaceful means, not military force.

[5] Hizbullah-Iran website (Iran), May 15, 2010.

[6] The author is using a term from the time of the Prophet Muhammad, in early Islam, to define the opposition.

[7] The author is referring to the weakness of the kings of the Qajar dynasty (1796-1925), who lost the Caucasus and Central Asia (including Azerbaijan, Dagestan, Georgia, Armenia and Nakhchivan) to Czarist Russia in two humiliating treaties: The Treaty of Golestan in 1813 and the Treaty of Turkemenchay in 1828.

[8] Here the author incorporates into the history of Islamic Iran areas and peoples who were part of pre-Islamic Persian empires. He thus grants “Iranianness” dimensions beyond those of Islam which are based on the notion of ancient Iranian territories and ethnic nationality.

[9] Note that this contradicts article 4 on the list, which promises that Greater Iran will spare other countries from bearing the cost of the struggle. The author apparently wants to appease the “domestic opposition” opposed to the heavy political and economic price of Iran’s struggle against Israel.

[10] According to the Shi’ite belief, we are currently living in the Period of Entezar, i.e., anticipation for the coming of the Mahdi, which will end with his arrival.

Iran is building intermediate-range missile launch pads on the Paraguaná Peninsula, and engineers from a construction firm – Khatam al-Anbia – owned by the Revolutionary Guards visited Paraguaná in February. Amir al-Hadschisadeh, the head of the Guard’s Air Force, approved the visit, according to the report. Die Welt cited information from “Western security insiders.”

The rocket bases are to include measures to prevent air attacks on Venezuela as well as commando and control stations.

The Iranian military involvement in the project extends to bunker, barracks and watchtower construction. Twenty-meter deep rocket silos are planned. The cost of the Venezuelan military project is being paid for with Iranian oil revenue. The Iranians paid in cash for the preliminary phase of the project, which amounted to “dozens of millions” of dollars, Die Welt wrote.

The Paraguaná Peninsula is on the coast of Venezuela and is roughly 120 kilometers from America’s main South American partner, Colombia.

According to Die Welt, the clandestine agreement between Venezuela and Iran would mean the Chavez government would fire rocket at Iran’s enemies should the Islamic Republic face military strikes.

Meanwhile the German press agency (DPA) reported on Friday that Germany will not contest the placement of the Hamburg- based European- Iranian Trade Bank (EIH) on the EU sanctions list at the end of the month. The US Treasury Department sanctioned the EIH last year, saying it was one of the most important institutions in Europe for financing Iran’s missile and nuclear proliferation programs. Germany was the subject of criticism from American, French, British and Israeli officials because it refused to shut the EIH.

The EIH plays a crucial role in facilitating financial transactions for midsize German firms that are active in Iran. German- Iranian total trade amounted to over 4 billion euros in 2010, making German Iran’s No. 1 EU trade partner.

What a hack job. I knew this once I saw it was posted on the Jerusalem Post. Go do a puff piece on Eratz Israel. And put the dots together on how all the lands that are not Israel now, there are wars on conquest being fought currently.

You can quote a hundred or a thousand articles citing conspiracies for “greater iran” and what they could possibly do. The facts until today are that the country with the greatest occupation record of the last 100 years is the US. There are only a handful of countries left where they haven’t sent their military yet to interfere. Using empirical probabilities the odds of the US starting another war and occupying another country are much larger than Iran establishing a kingdom of which you speak.